I'm getting conflicting direction, so I turn to the font of all knowledge to resolve my dilemma.

In a narrative list of items (as opposed to a bulleted list) do you end the individual entries with a comma or semicolon or should you only use bulleted lists? To wit:

A bulleted list:

SIGforum is the font of all knowledge because:

(1) it is really an internet search engine in disguise;

(2) the members' education and experience spans the scope of the human experience; or

(3) Deus Vult.


Comma separator:

SIGforum is the font of all knowledge because (1) it is really an internet search engine in disguise, (2) the members' education and experience spans the scope of the human experience, or (3) Deus Vult.


Semicolon separator:

SIGforum is the font of all knowledge because (1) it is really an internet search engine in disguise; (2) the members' education and experience spans the scope of the human experience; and (3) Deus Vult.

Question:
So which say you:

Choices:
Bulletted list
Comma
Semicolon

 

Bulleted lists either should have no punctuation at the end or should all be punctuated the same (entire sentence with period).

Of your examples, the 2nd is the most correct in my experience.

I didn't vote in the poll.

Rule #1. Consistency. The first method used in the document defines the format of the rest. That is, it's writer's prerogative.

quote:

Originally posted by LS1 GTO:
Rule #1. Consistency. The first method used in the document defines the format of the rest. That is, it's writer's prerogative.

This is my vote as well.

I would use commas without the numbers.

Bulleted list. It's what I learned in journalism writing class years ago when journalism was an honest profession.

I don't have a reference to confirm it, but in the bulleted list that begins with a colon (":"), I would end each bullet with a semicolon (";") except for the last, which should have the terminal period (".") to end the sentence.

In the narrative form, either semicolon or comma (",") separators would be appropriate as intermediate separators, but they should all be the same. If none of the elements themselves included a comma, then I would use commas; if any of the individual elements included a comma, then I'd use semicolons for all element separators. (I was taught that, except for specific usages defined, semicolons were just strong commas.)

Actually, even in the narrative form I usually include an introductory colon--under those circumstances I would use semicolons for the separators (colons imply semicolons).

As I said, I don't have any documentary support for this, but it's what I do.

flashguy

Since this is a thread about grammar, and since I’m basically a grammar nazi, it’s actually “FOUNT of knowledge”; “fount” being short for fountain.



To your list, you have two choices...bulleted list without punctuation or the list with commas as depicted. Numbering in the comma list is fine.

Make sure you get it right. The wrong answer could cost millions.

A lawsuit over the absence of an Oxford comma was settled for $5 million

Option 1.

#1. Consistency is king. Writers are allowing themselves and others much more license these days.

Also, don't get them writer folks started on Oxford commas. It's a thing.

quote:

Originally posted by enidpd804:
#1. Consistency is king. Writers are allowing themselves and others much more license these days.

Also, don't get them writer folks started on Oxford commas. It's a thing.

Strunk & White were all FOR the "Oxford Comma"--that's good enough for me. (And it avoids possible confusion.)

flashguy

quote:

Originally posted by flashguy:

quote:

Originally posted by enidpd804:
#1. Consistency is king. Writers are allowing themselves and others much more license these days.

Also, don't get them writer folks started on Oxford commas. It's a thing.

Strunk & White were all FOR the "Oxford Comma"--that's good enough for me. (And it avoids possible confusion.)

flashguy

See?

I used to always Oxford comma. One of my editors unOxford comma'd all my stuff. I didn't want to die on that hill. They almost all uncomma my stuff and use hyphens instead - like the godforsaken heathens they are.

I think you mean 'fount'. Fount of knowledge. /nazi

quote:

Originally posted by flashguy:

quote:

Originally posted by enidpd804:
#1. Consistency is king. Writers are allowing themselves and others much more license these days.

Also, don't get them writer folks started on Oxford commas. It's a thing.

Strunk & White were all FOR the "Oxford Comma"--that's good enough for me. (And it avoids possible confusion.)

flashguy

The Oxford Comma doesn't always work to avoid confusion, so you can never assume that it always works. For example:

I went to the Oscars after-party with my children, James Franco, Meryl Streep [,] and Denzel Washington.

Don't rely on a comma to do what really should be by rearranging items in a list.

Purpose rules (or overrules, on occasion) form.

If you're asking a question, as the "or" seems to imply, then bullet points is the clearest way to present the question - your big problem there is highlighting the "or" in such a way that the sequence of ideas is easily identifiable as a series of discrete options from which the reader is being asked to choose.

If you're looking for a humorous or casual way to explain that there are great and complex theories involved, none of which are mutually exclusive, but that ultimately the answer may be unknowable except as an adjunct to a deep religious experience, the second is perfectly correct. One might plausibly argue that there should be a comma after the "(3)", that's really more of an aesthetic thing.

If you want to make a simple declarative statement, the third version is just fine.

One way of thinking about it is this: the semicolon separates ideas that are each worthy of careful thought and attention in isolation from the others. If only due to their relative scarcity, they jostle the reader into looking at each item in a list more carefully and, the author hopes, a bit more thoughtfully. Commas separate ideas that are interesting if you string them all together, but may not be as interesting if you consider each of them in isolation from the rest. They delineate discrete ideas in a way meant to keep the eye flowing over the text so that the mind quickly and easily focuses on and absorbs a larger, composite set of ideas.

After 4 surguries I have a semi colon. :-)

Bob

I didn't vote because I think the choice is entirely up to the poster. Here's my take: Each item in a bulleted list is a separate and complete thought. Therefore, no punctuation is needed (a period may suffice is the item is a complete sentence). Other than that, the Purdue University Online Writing Lab suggests using commas between independent clauses when they are joined with a conjunction (and, but, for, or, not, so, yet) and a semicolon when they are not.

quote:

Originally posted by flashguy:
I don't have a reference to confirm it, but in the bulleted list that begins with a colon (":"), I would end each bullet with a semicolon (";") except for the last, which should have the terminal period (".") to end the sentence.

In the narrative form, either semicolon or comma (",") separators would be appropriate as intermediate separators, but they should all be the same. If none of the elements themselves included a comma, then I would use commas; if any of the individual elements included a comma, then I'd use semicolons for all element separators. (I was taught that, except for specific usages defined, semicolons were just strong commas.)

Actually, even in the narrative form I usually include an introductory colon--under those circumstances I would use semicolons for the separators (colons imply semicolons).

As I said, I don't have any documentary support for this, but it's what I do.

flashguy

Concur with flashguy re: semi-colon to separate the independent clauses in a series introduced by a colon. While independent clauses may be separated by a comma, the longer they are--and especially if they have excessive phrases or dependent clauses--the more the semi-colon is needed.

I do not, however, concur with "always use an Oxford comma" mantra, especially not from Strunk and White. Strunk and White are excessively prescriptive and are rather blinkered by the notion that English ought to operate like Latin (e.g. no split infinitives, not ending sentences with prepositions, etc.), when it is clearly a Germanic language, which admits much of what Strunk and White prescribe.

Regardless of my general dislike of Strunk and White, and apropos of the OP, clarity and precision are key in writing, so I agree there.

if it's not illegal (yet) or politically incorrect (yet) do as you please.,:}+?